J. Non-Equilib. Thermodyn.

2023; aop

Liaqat Ali*, Pardeep Kumar, Zahoor Iqbal, Sharifah E. Alhazmi, Sujesh Areekara, M. M.
Alqarni, Alphonsa Mathew and Retna Apsari*
The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective
micropolar-based nanofluid flow by the influence of
nanoparticle’s diameter and nanolayer via stretching
sheet: sensitivity analysis approach
https://doi.org/10.1515/jnet-2022-0064
Received September 17, 2022; accepted January 9, 2023; published online January 24, 2023

Abstract: The proposed study demonstrates the flow phenomenon and thermo-variation of a magnetized
stretching sheet induced-radiative nanofluid flow. By incorporating the response surface methodology, the heat
transfer rate of the thermally convective flow of nanofluid is optimized. The graphene nanomaterial is used
in the water-based nanofluid. A dynamic magnetic field, thermal radiation, and the Cattaneo–Christov heat
flux model have used to represent the thermal behavior of the nanofluid. The simulation utilizes experimen-
tally estimated values for the nanomaterial’s thermal conductivity and viscosity. To further reveal the thermal
enhancement of the flow, the impact of nanoparticle diameter and the solid-liquid interfacial layer is proposed
at the molecular level. The response surface methodology and the sensitivity analysis has used to examine the
effects of the nanoparticle volume fraction, Biot number, and magnetic parameter on the rate of heat trans-
fer statistically. A set of equations is formed from the governing partial differential equations by implementing
suitable similarity transformations. The bvp4c approach is used to solve the problem numerically. The effect
of various parameters has displayed through tables, graphs, and surface plots on heat transfer, mass transfer,
and the local Nusselt number. It is discovered that as the Biot number increases, so does the concentration and
temperature profile. An excellent accord between the present and previously existing solutions is establishing
the validity of the achieved results.

Keywords: Cattaneo–Christov; nanofluid; nanoparticle diameter; response surface methodology; thermal radi-
ation.
2010 MSC: 00-01; 99-00.

1 Introduction
Mechanisms for improving passive heat transfer include adding nanoparticles to a base fluid, making surfaces
elastic, applying a magnetic flux, adding manufactured surface roughness, attaching fins, and inserting barriers.

*Corresponding authors: Liaqat Ali, School of Sciences, Xi’an Technological University, Xi’an, 710021, China; and Department of Engi-
neering, Faculty of Advanced Technology and Multidiscipline, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia,
E-mail: math1234@stu.xjtu.edu.cn; and Retna Apsari, Department of Engineering, Faculty of Advanced Technology and Multidiscipline,
Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia; and Department of Physics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Airlangga,
Surabaya 60115, Indonesia, E-mail: retna-a@fst.unair.ac.id
Pardeep Kumar, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, 125004, India
Zahoor Iqbal, Department of Mathematics, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
Sharifah E. Alhazmi, Mathematics Department, Al-Qunfudah University College, Umm Al-Qura University, Mecca, KSA
Sujesh Areekara and Alphonsa Mathew, Department of Mathematics, St. Thomas College (Autonomous), Thrissur 680001, Kerala,
India. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7860-8268 (S. Areekara)
M. M. Alqarni, Department of Mathematics, College of Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha 61413, Saudi Arabia
2 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

Scientists have put in a lot of work over the past few decades to make new nanofluids with better performance.
A nanofluid comprising two or more nanoparticles is a hybrid nanofluid. Numerous studies have shown that
hybrid nanofluids are superior to single nanofluids. Single nanoparticles altered the temperature distribution
less than hybrid nanoparticles. Choi and Eastman [1] first identified the unique heat transmission and cool-
ing properties of nanofluid. They found that the physical and chemical characteristics of the standard fluid
and nanofluid are different, and proposed nanofluid as a suspension of nanoparticles (1–100 nm in size) in the
base fluid. Ayub et al. [2] describe the study through a horizontal Riga, electro-magnetohydrodynamic nanofluid
flow. Heat and mass transfer using magneto-micropolar electrically conducting nanofluid flow over a linearly
stretching sheet with convective boundary conditions is studied by Bilal [3]. He includes joule heating effects and
non-linear thermal radiation in the energy equation. Thermal radiation and electro-magnetohydrodynamics
(EMHD) phenomena have also been studied in an infinitely spinning disk’s convective boundary layer flow of a
nanofluid [4].
Quadratic convective flow of radiated nano-Jeffrey liquid exposed to multiple convective conditions and
Cattaneo–Christov double diffusion is described by Kumar et al. [5]. The impacts of convective conditions, mag-
netohydrodynamics (MHD), and nonlinear radiation are considered. The effects of two thermal boundaries
controlling surface temperature and energy flux on micropolar-based nanofluid transport through a porous
medium are investigated by Ali et al. [6]. This magnetic field of uniform strength acts normally on the sheet as
it is formed by the Arrhenius activation energy and the thermal radiation. Bagh et al. [7] investigated the 3D
convective heat transfer features of a magnetohydrodynamic nanofluid flow that comprised oxytactic motile
microorganisms and nanoparticles and flowed through a rotating cone. The impact of thermal energy, velocity
profiles, and concentration slip on an MHD flow of a nanofluid constrained by Sohaib et al. [8] over the stretch-
ing surface. Nepal [9] has investigated the role of nanofluid in the augmentation of mixed convection flow for
heat transfer across a wavy surface. Kumar et al. [10] examined the optimization of entropy in the nonlinear
mixed convective unsteady MHD flow of nanomaterials in a porous medium.
The presence of density gradient in the flow field causes the bioconvection phenomenon. As a result,
particle movement at the macroscopic level improves the stratification of the base liquid in one direction.
Many researchers were intrigued by the presence of such gyrotactic microorganisms in the nanofluid flow
because of their potential applications in enzymes, biosensors, biotechnology, drug delivery, and biofuels. These
applications prompted many researchers to conduct numerical studies on bioconvective nanofluid flow with
microorganisms passed through the different flow field geometry. Chu [11] used the homotopy analysis method
to investigate the bioconvective Maxwell nanofluid flow via reversible regularly pivoting sheet in the presence
of nonlinear radiative and heat emitter influences. The Cattaneo–Christov heat flux model is used to analyze the
magneto-bioconvective flow of nanofluid through a rotating cone. They examined the effects of Stefan blowing,
Navier slip, cross-diffusion, thermo-diffusion, and porous media [12]. Tangent hyperbolic nanofluid bioconvec-
tive MHD flow with Newtonian heating has studied by Shafiq et al. [13]. They found that both the magnetic
parameter and the inclination angle diminished the velocity profile, while the temperature profile decreased
with higher nanoparticle concentrations.
On the magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) boundary layer flow, the two-fold diffusion effect, the influence of
changing thermal viscosity, and bioconvection. The motile microorganism benefits from a higher Péclet number
[14]. Chemical reaction parameters and motile density stratification parameters affect the density of microorgan-
isms. As Saranya and Radha [15] explain, there are numerous uses for nanofluid bioconvection in the production
of new pharmaceutical medicines. The flow of an MHD bioconvective micropolar nanofluid restraining microor-
ganism is investigated with a 2-D laminar bioconvective boundary [6, 16]. Tangent hyperbolic nanofluid flow-
based numerical modelling of nanoparticle size and thermal radiation with magnetic field effect explain by [17].
The Soret and Dufour effects were used to analyze the two-dimensional radiative heat transfer of second-grade
fluid flow through a stretched cylinder [18].
A moving permeable stretched cylinder with Soret-Dufour effects is used to examine MHD stagnation point
flow, which is investigated by Ramzan et al. [19]. In the presence of microorganisms and activation energy, the
bioconvective incompressible flow of Maxwell nanofluid is elaborated. Investigations are also conducted into
thermophoresis diffusion and Brownian motion diffusion [20]. Many research and industry industries place a
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 3

high value on experimental design. Experimentation is the application of interventions to experimental units
and is not a research process but rather a calculation of one or more responses [21, 22]. The response surface
methodology is one of the most popular experimental strategies for optimization. Researchers are increasingly
using statistical methods (such as sensitivity analysis) to examine the physical quantities (mass transfer, surface
dragging, and heat transfer rate). The response surface methodology examines the combined effect of influenc-
ing factors (independent factors) on the relevant physical quantity (response variable). Contrarily, sensitivity
analysis assesses the degree and kind of dependency that the independent variables exhibit concerning the
response variable [23, 24].
A close examination of the aforementioned literature reveals that the radiative micropolar nanofluid flows
over the stretching sheet under the influence of a magnetic field and the double diffusion Cattaneo–Christov
heat flux model receives little attention. The flow has been modeled using thermal radiation, convective bound-
ary conditions, the Cattaneo–Christov heat flux model, Dufour, and the Soret effects. Hydrothermal variation is
being observed using graphene nanoparticles dissolved in water. There are numerous medicinal applications
for graphene nanoparticles, including medication delivery, photovoltaics, biosensors, and microbial fuel cells.
The governing equations have transformed into a non-dimensional form and quantitatively assessed. Thus, the
incorporation of the concepts of nanolayer, Cattaneo–Christov, and convective condition within the study makes
it a novel investigation. Surface Response Methodology (RSM) is a potent tool for measuring regional optimal
responses through a series of planned trials. This study would be very helpful to researchers who are working
on nanoparticles, their properties, and on the heat transfer phenomena.

2 Model description
The transport phenomena of the nonlinear convective and radiated flow of micropolar nanofluid suspending
different sizes, densities, and shapes of nanoparticles have considered in this case. The stretching sheet has used
to look at the nonlinear convective and radiative flow of a tangent hyperbolic micropolar nanofluid. We consider
two-dimensional tangent hyperbolic nanofluid flow over the wall coinciding with plane y = 0 of an incompress-
ible micropolar-based nanofluid. The Buongiorno model for nanoparticles has been taken into account, along
with the Cattaneo–Christov heat flux model. The intended flow is generated in the flow diagram with allusion
to the cartesian plane by mobility in the upright oriented sheet with y = 0, and fluid is consumed in along with
y > 0 in the mechanism OXY, as displayed in Figure 1(a). The sheet is elongated with the linear velocity u𝑤 = ax,
with a constant, whereas the origin remains stagnant. Evenly magnetic strength is applied to specific trend
transversal to the stretching sheet, and heated fluid along with wall described as −kn f 𝜕𝜕Ty = h f (T f − T). A set of
governing equations based on the above assertions and boundary layer estimations are given as [7, 25]:

𝜕 u 𝜕𝑣
+ =0 (1)
𝜕x 𝜕 y
𝜅 𝜕 N 𝜎n f (Bo )2
( )
𝜕u 𝜕u 𝜕2u √ 𝜕u 𝜕2u
u + 𝑣 = 𝜈n f (1 − n) 2 + 2nΓ𝜈n f 2
+ − u (2)
𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜌n f 𝜕 y 𝜌n f
𝜕N 𝜕N 𝛾 𝜕2N 𝜅 𝜕N
𝑣 +u = nf 2
− ( + N) (3)
𝜕y 𝜕x (𝜌n f ) j 𝜕 y (𝜌n f ) j 𝜕 y
( )2
𝜅n f 𝜕 2 T
( )
𝜕T 𝜕T 1 𝜕 qr 𝜕T 𝜕C 𝜏 DT 𝜕 T
u +𝑣 + 𝛿1 Φ1 = − + 𝜏 D B + (4)
𝜕x 𝜕y (𝜌c p )n f 𝜕 y2 (𝜌c p )n f 𝜕 y 𝜕y 𝜕y T∞ 𝜕 y
𝜕C 𝜕C 𝜕 2 C DT 𝜕 2 T
u + 𝑣 + 𝛿2 Φ2 = DB 2 + (5)
𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y T∞ 𝜕 y2
In addition, u indicates the velocity profile attributed to the x and 𝑣 to the y directions, respectively, and T
signifies the temperature of the fluid. The spin gradient dispersion is often denoted by the material parameter
𝛾n f = 𝜇n f ( j + k2 j). Additionally, 𝜅, j, 𝜌, and N are utilized to signify thickness vortices, micro-inertia, fluid den-
sity, and angular velocity (micro-rotation vector). The following are the boundary conditions for the described
4 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

Figure 1: Graphical interpretation of flow model. (a) Schematic configuration with coordinate system (b) solid-liquid interaction.

problem [5]:
𝜕 u −kn f
u = U𝑤 = ax, 𝑣 = 𝑣𝑤 , N = −m ,
𝜕 y h1 f
𝜕T D 𝜕C (6)
= (T f − T), B = (C f − C) at y = 0
𝜕y h2 f 𝜕 y

u → 0, N → 0, T → T∞ , C → C∞ at y → ∞

where T f represents the temperature of the fluid at the wall and the ambient temperature (T ∞ ). The value of the
boundary parameter m is 0 ≤ m ≤ 1, N = 0 occurs at the surface when m = 0 and the micro-elements cannot
rotate; the asymmetric fraction of the stiffness matrix dissipates at m = 0.5, and the turbulent boundary layer
flows at m = 1. The magnetic field factor, dynamic viscosity, and thickness of the based fluid are also represented
by B0 , 𝜇 f , 𝜌 f , appropriately. And

𝜕u 𝜕T 𝜕𝑣 𝜕 T 𝜕𝑣 𝜕 T 𝜕u 𝜕T 𝜕2T 𝜕2T 𝜕2T

Φ1 = u +𝑣 +u +𝑣 + 2u𝑣 + 𝑣2 2 + u2 2
𝜕x 𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕x 𝜕 y 𝜕 y 𝜕x 𝜕 x𝜕 y 𝜕y 𝜕x
𝜕u 𝜕C 𝜕𝑣 𝜕 C 𝜕𝑣 𝜕 C 𝜕u 𝜕C 𝜕2C 𝜕2C 𝜕2C
Φ2 = u +𝑣 +u +𝑣 + 2u𝑣 + 𝑣2 2 + u2 2
𝜕x 𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕x 𝜕 y 𝜕 y 𝜕x 𝜕 x𝜕 y 𝜕y 𝜕x

4𝛼 𝜕 T 4
The Rosseland [26] assumption is disclosed in the aspects of radiant heat fluxion here qr = 3K , the Rose-
1 𝜕y
land mean absorbing factor is K 1 , and Boltzman factor is (𝛼 ). While optimum thermal fluctuations in the flows
have examined, Taylor’s formula is being adopted. Afterward eliminating the higher order terms [27], it attained
the following:
3
4𝛼 𝜕 T 4 16𝛼 T∞ 𝜕T
qr = = (7)
3K1 𝜕 y 3K1 𝜕 y
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 5

With the assertion of viscous effects that generate a thermal flotation thrust, the sustained features are
acquired. The thermo-physical properties of graphene and water are encapsulated in Table 1. These estima-
tions are taken from [28, 29]. With the reference of Gosukonda [30] and Graham [31] the dynamical relationship
nanofluid’s and base fluid’s dynamic viscosities as described:
𝜇f
𝜇n f = , 𝜌n f = 𝜙𝜌s − 𝜌 f (𝜙 − 1), (𝜌C p )n f = 𝜙(𝜌C p )s + (𝜌C p ) f (𝜙 − 1) (8)
(1 − 𝜙)2.5
( )
𝜎s
𝜎n f 𝜎f
−1 𝜙
= 1 + 3( ) ( ) (9)
𝜎f 2+ 𝜎s
−𝜙 𝜎s
−1
𝜎f 𝜎f

𝜙klr (ks − klr )(2𝛾13 − 𝛾23 + 1) + 𝛾13 (ks + 2klr ) 𝜙𝛾23 (klr − k f ) + k f
{ }
𝜅n f = (10)
𝛾13 (2klr + ks ) − 𝜙(ks − klr )(𝛾13 + 𝛾23 − 1)

𝜙𝛽 (ks − 𝛽 k f )(2𝛾13 − 𝛾23 + 1) + 𝛾13 (ks + 2𝛽 k f ) 𝜙𝛾23 (𝛽 − 1) + 1

{ }
𝜅n f
= (11)
𝜅f 𝛾13 (2𝛽 k f + ks ) + 𝜙(𝛽 k f − ks )(𝛾13 + 𝛾23 − 1)
This fundamental flaw stems from the fact that the thermal conductivity associations in those conven-
tional concepts don’t take into account the presence of molecules at solid-liquid interfaces or nanoparticle
size. In Figure 1(b), the general description of such a nanolayer is shown. This enhanced thermal conductiv-
ity Equation (10) plays a significant contribution to the solid-liquid interface and nanoparticle diameter. Here,
we have designated the relationships between thermal conduction that were observed in [32, 33]. As a result,
the fractionalized thermal conductance in Equation (11), and have examined by [34]. The solid volumetric frac-
tion is 𝜙, and 𝜇 f expressed dynamical viscosity of the base fluid. Here, the value of 𝜙 have chosen between 0
and 0.2. However, for the experimental studies the value of 𝜙 must be restricted to a value less than or equal
h
to 2%. Here, 𝛾1 = 1 + 2d , 𝛾2 = 1 + hd and h = 2𝜋𝜎 1 , where 𝜎 1 ranges (0.2–0.8) nm and k lr = 𝛽 k f , ∀ 0 ≤ 𝛽 ≤ kks
f
and 𝛽 > 1, diameter d and interfacial layer thickness h. The density (𝜌 f and 𝜌s ), the thermal conductivity (𝜅 f
and 𝜅 s ), the electrical conductivity (𝜎 f and 𝜎 s ), and the heat impedances of the based-fluid and nonmaterial are
(𝜌c p ) f and (𝜌C p )s , accordingly. The flow function 𝜓 is generally described as 𝑣 = − 𝜕𝜓
𝜕x
and u = 𝜕𝜓
𝜕y
, which fulfill
Equation (1), and to transform the system of Equations (2)–(6) into ODEs, the similarity conditions [35] are as
follows: √
a
y, 𝜓 = a𝜈 f F(𝜂 )x, u = axF ′ (𝜂 ), 𝑣 = − a𝜈 f F(𝜂 )
√ √
𝜂=
𝜈f
(12)
T − T∞ C − C∞
√
N a
𝜃 (𝜂 ) = , Υ (𝜂 ) = , G=
T f − T∞ C f − C∞ ax 𝜈f
𝜓 and 𝜂 tend to represent the non-dimensional parameter and the flow component, respectively.
( )2
d2 F B 1 d 3 F d2 F
( )
B5 dG B4 dF dF
(1 + K) 1 − n + nWe 2 + K − M + F − =0 (13)
d𝜂 B2 d𝜂 3 B2 d𝜂 B 2 d𝜂 d𝜂 2 d𝜂

K B d2 G B d2 F
( )
dG dF
(1 + ) 1 2 + F −G −K 5 + 2G =0 (14)
2 B 2 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 B 2 d𝜂 2

Table 1: Thermophysical properties of particle and the base fluid.

Properties Density Specific heat capacity Thermal conductivity Electrical conductivity

𝝆 (kg/m3 ) C p (J/kg.K) 𝜿 (W/m.K) 𝝈 (S/m)
H2 O 997.10 4179.0 00.613 40.000
Graphene 2250.0 2100.0 2500.0 1.0 × 107
6 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

( )2
1 d2 𝜃 B 4 d𝜃 2
( ) ( )
Rd d𝜃 dΥ d𝜃 dF d𝜃 2d 𝜃
1+ + F + N b + N t − 𝜆 1 F + F =0 (15)
B3 Pr d𝜂 2 B 3 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 2
d2 Υ N t d2 𝜃 2
( )
dΥ dF dΥ 2d Υ
+ Le F + − Le 𝜆2 F + F =0 (16)
d𝜂 2 d𝜂 N b d𝜂 2 d𝜂 d𝜂 d𝜂 2

with boundary conditions as:

dF d2 F d𝜃
F(𝜂 ) = S, = 1, G(𝜂 ) = −m , B3 − Bi1 𝜃 (𝜂 ) = −Bi1 ,
d𝜂 d𝜂 2 d𝜂
dΥ
− Bi2 Υ(𝜂 ) = −Bi2 at 𝜂 = 0 (17)
d𝜂
dF
→ 0, G → 0, 𝜃 (𝜂 ) → 0, Υ(𝜂 ) → 0 at 𝜂 → ∞
d𝜂

where the involving parameters are defined as 𝜆1 is the thermal relaxation parameter, 𝜆2 is the concentra-
tion relaxation parameter, Le is the Lewis number, Pr is the Prandtl number, Nb is the Brownian movement
parameter. Thermophoresis occurs due to Brownian motion when a temperature gradient is imposed, and
the thermophoresis coefficients can be estimated by precisely simulating the Brownian motion of nanoparti-
cles [36]. And Rd is the parameter of radiation, Nt is the parameter of thermophoretic, Bi1 is the thermal Biot
number, Bi2 is the concentration Biot number, 𝜎 nf is electrical conductance of the nanofluid have been exam-
ined by the Garnett model [37]. And the magnetic field parameter M, Weissenberg number W e , and material
parameter K.
𝑣 𝜎 f B0 2 𝜈
S = − √𝑤 , M = , 𝜆1 = a𝛿1 , 𝜆2 = a𝛿2 , Pr = f ,
a𝜈 a𝜌 f 𝛼
√
𝜏 DT (T f − T∞ ) h 𝜈f
Nt = , Bi1 = 1 f
𝜈 T∞ 𝜅f a
√ √
2a3 4𝛼 ∗ T 3 h 𝜈f 𝜅
We = Γx , Rd = , Bi2 = 2 f , K= f,
𝜈f 3K1 𝜅 f DB a 𝜈f
𝜏 DB (C f − C∞ ) 𝜈
Nb = , Le =
𝜈 DB
𝜌n f (𝜌C p )n f k 𝜇 𝜎
B1 = , B2 = , B3 = n f , B4 = n f , B5 = n f
𝜌f (𝜌C p ) f kf 𝜇f 𝜎f

3 Engineering quantities
The skin friction coefficient Cf x , Nusselt number Nux and local Sherwood number Shrx are defined as
]
𝜇n f 𝜕𝜕uy
𝜏𝑤 y=0
C fx = = ,
𝜌 f (U𝑤 )2 𝜌 f (U𝑤 )2
]
− x𝜅n f 𝜕𝜕Ty
xq𝑤 y=0
Nux = = ,
𝜅 f (T f − T∞ ) 𝜅 f (T f − T∞ )
]
x 𝜕𝜕Cy
y=0
Shrx =
DB (C f − C∞ )
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 7

where q𝑤 , 𝜏 𝑤 denotes the heat fluxion, and shear-stress accordingly. And physical quantity Nusselt factor Nux ,
friction factor Cf x and local Sherwood number Shrx are described as,
1√ n B
Rex C fx = {(1 − n) + We F ′′ (0)}(1 + K) 1 ,
2 2 B2
Nu
√ x = −(B3 + Rd )𝜃 ′ (0), Shrx Rex = −Υ′ (0)
√
Rex
√
√ ax
where Rex = √
𝜈f
is Reynold number.

4 Numeric methodology
To solve the system of Equations (13)–(17) a numerical approach bvp4c has implemented. The boundary value
problem can be addressed numerically by employing the bvp4c solver, which is a built-in tool of MATLAB. An
initial estimation of the intended solution is required to compute ODEs. If the estimation is accurate, this should
satisfy the boundary conditions and reveal the behavior of the solution. The obtained consequences are used as
an initial point for the problem’s solution with only a small change in the settings. This allows us to tweak the
parameters periodically until they are as close as possible to the optimal values. This approach is discussed by
Shampine et al. [38]. The first step is to reduce the partial governing equations to a set of first-order ordinary
differential equations described as:
F = y1 , F ′ = y2 , F ′′ = y3 (18)

F ′′′ = [ −1 ] B5 K y7 − B4 M y2 + B2 y1 y3 − y22
[ ( )]
(19)
B1 (1 + K) 1 − n + nWe y3
−2 [
G = y4 , G′ = y5 , G′′ =
]
B y y − B2 y2 y4 − KB5 (y3 + 2y4 ) (20)
B1 [2 + K] 2 1 5
−Pr
𝜃 = y6 , 𝜃 ′ = y7 , 𝜃 ′′ = [ ] B4 y1 y7 + B3 Nby7 y9 + B3 Nty27 − 𝜆1 B3 y1 y2 y7
[ ]
2
(21)
B5 + Rd + 𝜆1 y1

−1 [
Nt ′′
]
Υ = y8 , Υ′ = y9 , Υ′′ = 2 Ley1 y9 + 𝜃 − Le𝜆2 y1 y2 y9 (22)
1 + Le𝜆2 y1 Nb
The boundary conditions as

ya1 = S, ya2 = 1, ya4 = −my3 , B3 ya7 − Bi1 ya6 + Bi1 = 0,

ya9 − Bi2 ya8 + Bi2 = 0, at 𝜂=0

yr2 → 0, yr4 → 0, yr6 → 0, yr8 → 0, at 𝜂→∞

5 Response surface methodology

Response surface methodology (RSM) is a predictive model that elucidates the influence of relevant charac-
teristics (independent variables) on the physiological quantities of selection (response or dependent variable).
The RSM model for the dependent variable [39] is estimated using data from the central composite design
√
(CCD). In this problem, the heat transport of Graphene nanofluid denoted as Nux ∕ Rex for (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0) and
(𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2) is chosen as the dependent variable and Biot number (0.3 ≤ Bi1 ≤ 1.5), magnetic parameter
(0.1 ≤ M ≤ 0.5) and thermophoresis parameter (0.3 ≤ Nt ≤ 1.1) are chosen as the independent variables. Table 5
depicts the impact of parameters and their influence. The general model for the influencing variable including
the linear, quadratic, and interactive terms is given by:

Response = r1 A + r2 B + r3 C + r4 AB + r5 BC + r6 AC + r7 A2 + r8 B2 + r9 C 2 + r10 (23)

8 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

And the regression coefficients are represented by ri (i = 1 → 10) (Table 3 demonstrates the selective input
of experimental parameters). Table 3 demonstrates the selective input of experimental parameters. Table 4
provides the experimental design and the response for the 20 runs in accordance with CCD.

6 Results and discussion

6.1 Parametric analysis

The validation of our results is declared excellent in accordance with the published studies that are displayed in
Table 2. And Table 5 shows the effect on physical quantities due to variation in different parameters. Figure 2(a)
and (b) exhibited the impact of the volume fraction of nanoparticles 𝜙 and the magnetic effect on the velocity
of the nanofluid. The velocity profile is a diminishing function of M and 𝜙. Physically, an increase in the volume
fraction of nanoparticles causes a decrease in the thermal conductivity of the nanofluid and an increase in viscos-
ity, both of which diminish the nanofluid’s velocity. It’s interesting to note that a larger magnetic field increases
the resistance to nanofluid flow, which lowers the velocity profile. The effect of the nanoparticle volume fraction
𝜙 on the angular velocity of the nanofluid is shown in Figure 3(a). The angular velocity profile becomes wider
with 𝜙. Figure 3(b) displays the variation in angular velocity for increasing values of the concentration of micro-
elements. When m is increased, the micro-element concentration is reduced, and the micro-rotation profile is
enhanced.
According to Brownian motion theory, the speed of nanoparticles is directly proportional to temperature. As
the temperature rises, the kinetic energy of the nanoparticles increases, resulting in faster movement, which in
turn increases the fluid’s temperature. Figure 4(a) demonstrates that the thermal profile and associated bound-
ary layer thickness are increased for increasing amounts of Nb. The concentration profile is affected by the
Brownian motion parameter Nb is depicted in Figure 4(b). A decline in profile results from an increase in Nb.
Physically, Brownian motion causes the fluid in the boundary layer to heat up and aggravate the particles outside
of the fluid domain, which causes a decrease in the concentration profile.
The effect of the thermal biot number Bi1 on the temperature and concentration field is shown in Figure 5(a)
and (b). These profiles are enhanced with Bi1 . Dynamic heat transport and stretched surface heat transfer esti-
mates are two examples of physical applications of the Biot number. The temperature disparity rises as a result of

Table 2: Assessment of −𝜃 ′ (0) for specific Pr values if all other parameters are kept constant at 0.1.

Pr Gorla and Sidawi [40] Khan and pop [41] Hamad [42] Present results

0.70 0.4534 0.4539 0.45391 0.453916

2.00 0.9114 0.9113 0.91136 0.911358
7.00 1.8905 1.8954 1.89540 1.895405
20.0 3.3539 3.3539 3.35390 3.353963
70.0 6.4622 6.4622 6.46220 6.462331

Table 3: Effective parameter levels.

Levels
Parameter Symbol
Low (−1) Median (0) High (1)

Bi1 A 0.3 0.9 1.5

M B 0.1 0.3 0.5
Nt C 0.3 0.7 1.1
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 9

Table 4: Experimental design with response.

√ √
Coded values Actual values Response (Nux ∕ Rex ) Response (Nux ∕ Rex )
Run
A B C Bi M Nt 𝝀 = 𝝀 = 0 𝝀 = 𝝀 = 0.2
1 −1 −1 −1 0.3 0.1 0.01 0.723186 0.728365
2 1 −1 −1 1.5 0.1 0.01 1.789059 1.793470
3 −1 1 −1 0.3 0.5 0.01 0.717729 0.722796
4 1 1 −1 1.5 0.5 0.01 1.755813 1.760719
5 −1 −1 1 0.3 0.1 0.09 0.676119 0.678728
6 1 −1 1 1.5 0.1 0.09 1.508057 1.487967
7 −1 1 1 0.3 0.5 0.09 0.669916 0.672634
8 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 0.09 1.477460 1.460716
9 −1 0 0 0.3 0.3 0.05 0.698200 0.702404
10 1 0 0 1.5 0.3 0.05 1.633489 1.627290
11 0 −1 0 0.9 0.1 0.05 1.356790 1.359309
12 0 1 0 0.9 0.5 0.05 1.334991 1.338044
13 0 0 −1 0.9 0.3 0.01 1.436170 1.445647
14 0 0 1 0.9 0.3 0.09 1.243881 1.249524
15 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246
16 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246
17 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246
18 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246
19 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246
20 0 0 0 0.9 0.3 0.05 1.345482 1.348246

enhanced convective heating at the surface as a function of Bi1 . A greater temperature difference allows the ther-
mal influence to reach deeper into the quiescent fluid. The fluid temperature increases with the enhancement
of Bi1 over the surface, decreasing the sheet’s thermal resistance and promoting convective heat transfer.

6.2 Statistical analysis

The efficacy of the predicted model is elaborated in the ANOVA Tables 6 and 7. A parameter is substantial if its
F-value is greater than 1 and its p-value is less than 0.05 [43]. The interaction term (M × Nt) and the nonlinear
factors in M and Nt are ascertained to be insignificant (both cases). Consequently, these factors are eliminated
from the model. The model’s significance level R2 is observed to be 99.97%, which increases the precision of the
√
model. The fitted quadratic models for (Nux ∕ Rex ) in un-coded form are given by:
√
Nux ∕ Rex at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0) = 0.2301 + 1.8566Bi1 − 0.0291M + 0.0406Nt
−0.49508Bi1 × Bi1 − 0.0544Bi1 × M
√
− 0.24191Bi1 × Nt
Nux ∕ Rex at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2) = 0.23079 + 1.8900Bi1 − 0.0052M + 0.0197Nt
−0.51090Bi1 × Bi1 − 0.0504Bi1 × M
−0.26339Bi1 × Nt

The reliability of the estimated model is further adjudged using the residual versus observation order plot
given in Figure (6). Further, a maximum error of 0.010 can be observed from the fitted versus residual plot which
also contributes to the accuracy of the model. The simultaneous influence of two independent variables on the
response variables is depicted in (contour plot) in Figure (7) and (surface plot) in Figure (8), where the third
parameter is fixed at the midpoint. For bigger values of Bi and smaller values of M and Nt, the heat transport
(in both situations) appears to be the greatest.
10 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

−1∕2 1∕2 −1∕2

Table 5: The Nusselt number Nux Rex , skin friction coefficient 21 C f xx and Sherwood number Shrx Rex for different values of
M, Rd , Bi1 , Bi2 , 𝜆1 while other parameters remain fixed.

−∕ 1 1∕2 −∕

M Rd Bi Bi 𝝀 Nux Rex C x
2 f x
Shrx Rex

0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.2 −1.355496 0.997054 0.185074

0.3 – – – – −1.480979 0.991007 0.176048
0.5 – – – – −1.595079 0.985405 0.168044
0.7 – – – – −1.700454 0.980137 0.160869
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.2 −1.355496 0.878171 0.183702
– 0.5 – – −1.355496 0.997054 0.185074
– 0.7 – – – −1.355496 1.112785 0.186535
– 1.0 – – – −1.355496 1.280887 0.188846
0.2 0.5 0.1 0.5 – −1.355496 0.282634 0.209220
– – 0.3 – – −1.355496 0.705427 0.194427
– – 0.7 – – −1.355496 1.205304 0.178874
– – 0.9 – – −1.355496 1.359309 0.174570
0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 – −1.355496 1.041813 0.065047
– – – 0.3 – −1.355496 1.013851 0.141505
– – – 0.7 – −1.355496 0.985850 0.213244
– – – 0.9 – −1.355496 0.977847 0.232960
0.2 0.5 0.5 – 0 −1.355496 0.989207 0.156423
– – – – 0.1 −1.355496 0.992796 0.171788
– – – – 0.2 −1.355496 0.997054 0.185074
– – – – 0.3 −1.355496 1.001974 0.196328

1 1

0.9
(a) 1
= 2=0
0.9
(b) 1
= 2=0
= 2 = 0.2 1
= 2 = 0.2
1
0.8 0.8

0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6
F'( )
F'( )

0.5 0.5
= 0.0, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20 M = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 04, 0.5
0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 2: Variation in velocity with respect to 𝜆1 & 𝜆2 for various values of 𝜙 and M.

6.3 Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis is the statistical technique that analyses the nature and magnitude of dependency exhibited
by the independent variables on the response variable [44, 45]. The quadratic model for Nux (Rex )−1∕2 in uncoded
form after neglecting the insignificant terms is given at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0):

√
Nux ∕ Rex = 1.34492 + 0.46787A − 0.00973B − 0.08465C − 0.17823A2

− 0.00652AB − 0.05806AC
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 11

0.6 1.8

(a) 1
= 2=0
1.6
(b) 1
= 2=0

0.5 1
= 2 = 0.2 1
= 2 = 0.2
1.4

0.4 1.2

1
0.3
= 0.0, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20 0.8 m = 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, 1.1, 1.4

0.2 0.6

0.4
0.1
0.2

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 3: Variation in microrotation velocity with respect to 𝜆1 & 𝜆2 for various values of 𝜙 and m.

0.5 0.8

0.45
(a) 1
= 2=0 (b) 1
= 2=0
0.7
1
= 2 = 0.2 1
= 2 = 0.2
0.4
0.6
0.35
0.5
0.3

0.25 0.4 Nb = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0

Nb = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0
0.2
0.3
0.15
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.05

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 4: Variation in temperature and volume fraction with respect to 𝜆1 & 𝜆2 at various Nb values.

0.7 0.8

(a) 1
= 2=0 (b) 1
= 2=0
0.6 0.7
1
= 2 = 0.2 1
= 2 = 0.2

0.6
0.5

0.5
0.4
Bi 1 = 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.5 0.4 Bi 1 = 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2, 1.5
0.3
0.3

0.2
0.2

0.1 0.1

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 5: Variation in temperature and volume fraction with respect to 𝜆1 & 𝜆2 at various Bi1 values.
12 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

Table 6: ANOVA table for 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.

Parameters Deg. of freedom Adj. sum of squares Adj. mean squares f-Value p-Value

Model 9 2.45024 0.27225 7967.510 0.000

Linear 3 2.26166 0.75389 22062.89 0.000
Bi1 1 2.18905 2.18905 64063.78 0.000
M 1 0.00095 0.00095 27.71000 0.000
Nt 1 0.07166 0.07166 2097.180 0.000
Square 3 0.16127 0.05376 1573.230 0.000
Bi1 × Bi1 1 0.08736 0.08736 2556.530 0.000
M×M 1 0.00001 0.00001 0.270000 .
Nt × Nt 1 0.00005 0.00005 1.320000 .
2-Way interaction 3 0.02731 0.00910 266.3900 0.000
Bi1 × M 1 0.00034 0.00034 9.960000 0.010
Bi1 × Nt 1 0.02697 0.02697 789.2100 0.000
M × Nt 1 0.00000 0.00000 0.010000 .
Error 10 0.00034 0.00003 – –
Lack-of-Fit 5 0.00034 0.00007 ∗ ∗

Pure error 5 0.00000 0.00000 – –

Total 19 2.45058 – – –
R2 = 99.99% Adjusted R2 = 99.97%

Bold values indicates that the results are significant and effective.

Table 7: ANOVA table for 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2.

Parameters Deg. of freedom Adj. sum of squares Adj. mean squares f-Value p-Value

Model 9 2.42422 0.26936 16157.080 0.000

Linear 3 2.22140 0.74047 44415.910 0.000
Bi1 1 2.13928 2.13928 128321.81 0.000
M 1 0.00086 0.00086 51.800000 0.000
Nt 1 0.08126 0.08126 4874.1100 0.000
Square 3 0.17056 0.05685 3410.2500 0.000
Bi1 × Bi1 1 0.09303 0.09303 5580.0800 0.000
M×M 1 0.00000 0.00000 0.0000000 .
Nt × Nt 1 0.00000 0.00000 0.2300000 .
2-Way interaction 3 0.03226 0.01075 645.08000 0.000
Bi1 × M 1 0.00029 0.00029 17.520000 0.002
Bi1 × Nt 1 0.03197 0.03197 1917.5200 0.000
M × Nt 1 0.00000 0.00000 0.1900000 .
Error 10 0.00017 0.00002 – –
Lack-of-fit 5 0.00017 0.00003 ∗ ∗

Pure error 5 0.00000 0.00000 – –

Total 19 2.42439 – – –
R2 = 99.99% Adjusted R2 = 99.99%

Bold values indicates that the results are significant and effective.

and at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2) as:

√
Nux ∕ Rex = 1.34846 + 0.46252A − 0.00929B − 0.09014C − 0.18392A2

− 0.00604AB − 0.06321AC
√
The sensitivity functions of Nux ∕ Rex at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0) as follows:
√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= 0.46787 − 0.35646A − 0.00652B − 0.05806C
𝜕A
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 13

Figure 6: Residual versus fitted value of Nux (Rex )−1∕2 for

𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2.

Figure 7: Contour plots for Nux (Rex )−1∕2 for 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.

√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= −0.00973 − 0.00652A
𝜕B
√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= −0.08465 − 0.05806A
𝜕C
√
The sensitivity functions of Nux ∕ Rex at (𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2) as follows:
√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= 0.46252 − 0.36784A − 0.00604B − 0.06321C
𝜕A
14 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

Figure 8: Surface plots for Nux (Rex )−1∕2 for 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.

√
Table 8: Sensitivity of response Nux ∕ Rex at 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0 when A = 0.

Sensitivity functions
B C √ √ √
𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex ) 𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex ) 𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex )
𝝏A 𝝏B 𝝏C

−1 −1 0.53245 −0.00973 −0.08465

- 0 0.47439 −0.00973 −0.08465
- 1 0.41633 −0.00973 −0.08465
0 −1 0.52593 −0.00973 −0.08465
- 0 0.46787 −0.00973 −0.08465
- 1 0.40981 −0.00973 −0.08465
1 −1 0.51941 −0.00973 −0.08465
- 0 0.46135 −0.00973 −0.08465
- 1 0.40329 −0.00973 −0.08465

√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= −0.00929 − 0.00604A
𝜕B
√
𝜕 (Nux ∕ Rex )
= −0.09014 − 0.06321A
𝜕C
The sensitivities of Nux (Rex )−1∕2 , keeping A in the medium level, have been tabulated in Tables 8 and 9.
It is noted that M and Nt exhibit negative sensitivity towards Nux (Rex )−1∕2 and Bi1 exhibits positive sensitivity
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 15

√
Table 9: Sensitivity of response Nux ∕ Rex at 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2 when A = 0.

Sensitivity functions
B C √ √ √
𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex ) 𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex ) 𝝏 (Nux ∕ Rex )
𝝏A 𝝏B 𝝏C

−1 −1 0.53177 −0.00929 −0.09014

- 0 0.46856 −0.00929 −0.09014
- 1 0.40535 −0.00929 −0.09014
0 −1 0.52573 −0.00929 −0.09014
- 0 0.46252 −0.00929 −0.09014
- 1 0.39931 −0.00929 −0.09014
1 −1 0.51969 −0.00929 −0.09014
- 0 0.45648 −0.00929 −0.09014
- 1 0.39327 −0.00929 −0.09014

Figure 9: Bar charts depicting the sensitivity of Nux (Rex )−1∕2 for 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 0.2.

towards Nux (Rex )−1∕2 . Furthermore, these results are in harmony with the RSM results. Figure (9) depict the
sensitivity of Nux (Rex )−1∕2 utilizing bar charts. It is observed that the heat transfer rate is most sensitive to the
changes in Bi1 and least sensitive to the changes in M.
16 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

7 Conclusions
The current study concentrated on the sensitivity analysis of two-dimensional incompressible MHD micropolar
graphene-water nanofluid flow across the stretching sheet. The governing PDEs are reduced to ODEs via simi-
larity transformations. The mathematical combination for the local Nusselt number, local skin friction, and local
Sherwood number is presented when different features are applied to the relevant parameters. This study offers
multiple intriguing findings, which are presented as follows cause of the complicated assembly of the quantities
impacted by the controlling factors:
(1) It is observed that the increasing effect of the magnetic field increases the resistance to nanofluid flow,
which lowers the velocity profile.
(2) The micro-rotational velocity decreases with the increasing values of the nanoparticle’s concentration.
(3) The temperature and concentration profiles increased with an increase in Biot number.
(4) Depending on the size and velocity of motion of the nanoparticles, the nanofluid has a variable temperature
layer and velocity profiles, and all of the associated characteristics increase the rate of heat transfer.
(5) The regression models are determined to be flawless for the specified range of involved parameters.

Acknowledgment: The first author acknowledge with thanks to School of Sciences for their support at Xian
Technological University, and the corresponding authors acknowledge with thanks to Universitas Airlangga.
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted
manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: The author Sharifah E. Alhazmi (sehazmi@uqu.edu.sa) would like to thank the Deanship of
Scientific Research at Umm Al-Qura University for supporting this work by Grant code (22UQU4282396DSR32).
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.

References

[1] S. U. Choi and J. A. Eastman, “Enhancing thermal conductivity of fluids with nanoparticles,” Argonne National Lab (ANL), Argonne,
IL, United States, Tech. Rep., 1995.
[2] M. Ayub, T. Abbas, and M. Bhatti, “Inspiration of slip effects on electromagnetohydrodynamics (emhd) nanofluid flow through a
horizontal riga plate,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus, vol. 131, no. 6, pp. 1 − 9, 2016..
[3] M. Bilal, “Micropolar flow of emhd nanofluid with nonlinear thermal radiation and slip effects,” Alex. Eng. J., vol. 59, no. 2,
pp. 965 − 976, 2020..
[4] R. Kumar and S. Singh, “Computational analysis of emhd flow of nanofluid over a rotating disk with convective boundary
conditions: buongiorno’s model,” in Advances in Fluid and Thermal Engineering, Singapore, Springer, 2021, pp. 231 − 247.
[5] P. S. Kumar, B. Mahanthesh, B. Gireesha, and S. Shehzad, “Quadratic convective flow of radiated nano-jeffrey liquid subject to
multiple convective conditions and Cattaneo − Christov double diffusion,” Appl. Math. Mech., vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 1311 − 1326, 2018..
[6] L. Ali, X. Liu, B. Ali, S. Mujeed, and S. Abdal, “Finite element simulation of multi-slip effects on unsteady mhd bioconvective
micropolar nanofluid flow over a sheet with solutal and thermal convective boundary conditions,” Coatings, vol. 9, no. 12, p. 842,
2019..
[7] L. Ali, B. Ali, and M. B. Ghori, “Melting effect on Cattaneo − Christov and thermal radiation features for aligned mhd nanofluid flow
comprising microorganisms to leading edge: fem approach,” Comput. Math. with Appl., vol. 109, pp. 260 − 269, 2022..
[8] S. Abdal, B. Ali, S. Younas, L. Ali, and A. Mariam, “Thermo-diffusion and multislip effects on mhd mixed convection unsteady flow of
micropolar nanofluid over a shrinking/stretching sheet with radiation in the presence of heat source,” Symmetry, vol. 12, no. 1,
p. 49, 2020..
[9] N. C. Roy and S. Siddiqa, “Effect of nanofluid on heat transfer enhancement for mixed convection flow over a corrugated surface,”
J. Non-Equilib. Thermody., vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 373 − 383, 2020..
[10] A. Kumar, V. Sugunamma, and N. Sandeep, “Numerical exploration of mhd radiative micropolar liquid flow driven by stretching
sheet with primary slip: a comparative study,” J. Non-Equilib. Thermody., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 101 − 122, 2019..
 L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow — 17

[11] Y. M. Chu, S. Aziz, M. I. Khan, et al., “Nonlinear radiative bioconvection flow of Maxwell nanofluid configured by bidirectional
oscillatory moving surface with heat generation phenomenon,” Phys. Scr., vol. 95, no. 10, p. 105007, 2020..
[12] L. Ali, Y. J. Wu, B. Ali, S. Abdal, and S. Hussain, “The crucial features of aggregation in tio2-water nanofluid aligned of chemically
comprising microorganisms: a fem approach,” Comput. Math. with Appl., vol. 123, pp. 241 − 251, 2022..
[13] A. Shafiq, Z. Hammouch, and T. Sindhu, “Bioconvective mhd flow of tangent hyperbolic nanofluid with newtonian heating,” Int. J.
Mech. Sci., vol. 133, pp. 759 − 766, 2017..
[14] M. Basir, M. Faisal, R. Kumar, et al., “Exploration of thermal-diffusion and diffusion-thermal effects on the motion of
temperature-dependent viscous fluid conveying microorganism,” Arab. J. Sci. Eng., vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 8023 − 8033, 2019..
[15] S. Saranya and K. Radha, “Review of nanobiopolymers for controlled drug delivery,” Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng., vol. 53, no. 15,
pp. 1636 − 1646, 2014..
[16] L. Zhang, M. M. Bhatti, R. Ellahi, and E. E. Michaelides, “Oxytactic microorganisms and thermo-bioconvection nanofluid flow over a
porous riga plate with Darcy − Brinkman − Forchheimer medium,” J. Non-Equilib. Thermody., vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 257 − 268, 2020..
[17] P. Kumar, H. Poonia, L. Ali, and S. Areekara, “The numerical simulation of nanoparticle size and thermal radiation with the
magnetic field effect based on tangent hyperbolic nanofluid flow,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 37, p. 102247, 2022..
[18] A. Shojaei, A. J. Amiri, S. S. Ardahaie, K. Hosseinzadeh, and D. Ganji, “Hydrothermal analysis of non-newtonian second grade fluid
flow on radiative stretching cylinder with soret and dufour effects,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 13, p. 100384, 2019..
[19] M. Ramzan, M. Farooq, T. Hayat, A. Alsaedi, and J. Cao, “Mhd stagnation point flow by a permeable stretching cylinder with
soret-dufour effects,” J. Cent. South Univ., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 707 − 716, 2015..
[20] B. Ali, L. Ali, S. Abdal, and M. I. Asjad, “Significance of brownian motion and thermophoresis influence on dynamics of reiner-rivlin
fluid over a disk with non-fourier heat flux theory and gyrotactic microorganisms: a numerical approach,” Phys. Scr., vol. 96, no. 9,
p. 094001, 2021..
[21] D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, John Wiley & Sons, 2017.
[22] A. Shafiq, T. N. Sindhu, and C. M. Khalique, “Numerical investigation and sensitivity analysis on bioconvective tangent hyperbolic
nanofluid flow towards stretching surface by response surface methodology,” Alex. Eng. J., vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 4533 − 4548, 2020..
[23] K. Thriveni and B. Mahanthesh, “Significance of variable fluid properties on hybrid nanoliquid flow in a micro-annulus with
quadratic convection and quadratic thermal radiation: response surface methodology,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 124,
p. 105264, 2021..
[24] J. Mackolil and B. Mahanthesh, “Sensitivity analysis of marangoni convection in tio2 − eg nanoliquid with nanoparticle aggregation
and temperature-dependent surface tension,” J. Therm. Anal. Calorim., vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 2085 − 2098, 2021..
[25] B. Ali, S. Hussain, Y. Nie, L. Ali, and S. U. Hassan, “Finite element simulation of bioconvection and Cattaneo-Christov effects on
micropolar based nanofluid flow over a vertically stretching sheet,” Chin. J. Phys., vol. 68, pp. 654 − 670, 2020..
[26] M. Q. Brewster, Thermal Radiative Transfer and Properties, John Wiley & Sons, 1992.
[27] L. Ali, X. Liu, B. Ali, A. Din, and Q. Al Mdallal, “The function of nanoparticle’s diameter and Darcy-forchheimer flow over a cylinder
with effect of magnetic field and thermal radiation,” Case Stud. Therm. Eng., vol. 28, p. 101392, 2021..
[28] S. E. Ahmed, A. K. Hussein, M. Mansour, Z. A. Raizah, and X. Zhang, “Mhd mixed convection in trapezoidal enclosures filled with
micropolar nanofluids,” Nanosci. Nanotechnol. Int. J., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 343 − 372, 2018..
[29] A. Aziz, W. Jamshed, Y. Ali, and M. Shams, “Heat transfer and entropy analysis of Maxwell hybrid nanofluid including effects of
inclined magnetic field, joule heating and thermal radiation,” Discrete Continuous Dyn. Syst. S, vol. 13, no. 10, p. 2667, 2020..
[30] S. Gosukonda, V. S. Gorti, S. B. Baluguri, and S. R. Sakam, “Particle spacing and chemical reaction effects on convective heat
transfer through a nano-fluid in cylindrical annulus,” Procedia Eng., vol. 127, pp. 263 − 270, 2015..
[31] A. L. Graham, “On the viscosity of suspensions of solid spheres,” Appl. Sci. Res., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 275 − 286, 1981..
[32] S. Murshed, K. Leong, and C. Yang, “Investigations of thermal conductivity and viscosity of nanofluids,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., vol. 47,
no. 5, pp. 560 − 568, 2008..
[33] K. Leong, C. Yang, and S. Murshed, “A model for the thermal conductivity of nanofluids − the effect of interfacial layer,”
J. Nanoparticle Res., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 245 − 254, 2006..
[34] L. Xue, P. Keblinski, S. Phillpot, S.-S. Choi, and J. Eastman, “Effect of liquid layering at the liquid − solid interface on thermal
transport,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, vol. 47, nos. 19 − 20, pp. 4277 − 4284, 2004..
[35] M. Ramzan, M. Farooq, T. Hayat, and J. D. Chung, “Radiative and joule heating effects in the mhd flow of a micropolar fluid with
partial slip and convective boundary condition,” J. Mol. Liq., vol. 221, pp. 394 − 400, 2016..
[36] E. E. Michaelides, “Brownian movement and thermophoresis of nanoparticles in liquids,” Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, vol. 81,
pp. 179 − 187, 2015..
[37] J. M. Garnett, “Xii. colours in metal glasses and in metallic films,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. − Ser. A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys.
Character, vol. 203, nos. 359 − 371, pp. 385 − 420, 1904.
[38] L. Shampine, I. Gladwell, and S. Thompson, Odes with Matlab, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[39] A. Sabu, J. Mackolil, B. Mahanthesh, and A. Mathew, “Nanoparticle aggregation kinematics on the quadratic convective
magnetohydrodynamic flow of nanomaterial past an inclined flat plate with sensitivity analysis,” Proc. IME E J. Process Mech. Eng.,
vol. 236, no. 3, pp. 1056 − 1066, 2022..
18 — L. Ali et al.: The optimization of heat transfer in thermally convective nanofluid flow

[40] R. S. R. Gorla and I. Sidawi, “Free convection on a vertical stretching surface with suction and blowing,” Appl. Sci. Res., vol. 52, no. 3,
pp. 247 − 257, 1994..
[41] W. Khan and I. Pop, “Boundary-layer flow of a nanofluid past a stretching sheet,” Int. J. Heat Mass Tran., vol. 53, nos. 11 − 12,
pp. 2477 − 2483, 2010..
[42] M. Hamad, “Analytical solution of natural convection flow of a nanofluid over a linearly stretching sheet in the presence of
magnetic field,” Int. Commun. Heat Mass Tran., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 487 − 492, 2011..
[43] S. Areekara, J. Mackolil, B. Mahanthesh, A. Mathew, and P. Rana, “A study on nanoliquid flow with irregular heat source and
realistic boundary conditions: a modified buongiorno model for biomedical applications,” J. Appl. Math. Mech./Z. Angew. Math.
Mech., vol. 102, no. 3, p. e202100167, 2022..
[44] A. Mathew, S. Areekara, and A. Sabu, “Sensitivity analysis on radiative heat transfer of hydromagnetic carreau nanoliquid flow
over an elongating cylinder using bulirsch-stoer algorithm,” Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog., vol. 25, p. 101038, 2021..
[45] A. Mathew, T. Neethu, and S. Areekara, “Three-dimensional hydromagnetic hybrid nanoliquid flow and heat transfer between two
vertical porous plates moving in opposite directions: sensitivity analysis,” Heat Tran., vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 6548 − 6571, 2021..